To think that living off a trust fund or parental income is no better than living off benefits.....

[Ravenspeckingearly]

.....in terms of the example you set your children.
I’ve crossed paths with a few of these types lately.....grown adults who do nothing except the school run twice a day (both parents do both trips) and spend the money that drops into their accounts on a monthly basis. Surely it just teaches their offspring that adult life is all about the gym and lunching? Can you teach your own children about ‘adulting’ if you’ve never had to do it yourself?
I know a couple of other adults who have trust funds or are heavily supported by parents to live a very affluent life, but they also have jobs, mostly in highly competitive professions.
Thoughts please.

I love my job, but I’m not sure I would continue to do it full time if we had enough wealth. A trust fund sounds amazing tbh, imagine the freedom it would bring.

@SnowyPetals

There are many ways to help your children grow up into responsible, well-rounded adults. You don't have to have a job to do that. You sound a bit jealous to me.

👍👌

Thanks for the comments. MN at its best....and I genuinely mean that. I was having a chat about this with a couple of people IRL both of whom appeared to agree with my view....and then i get the MN perspective!!!!!.....,although amongst the nastiness 1/3 agree.

Thank you to those who have shared more measured thoughtful perspectives.

I’m absolutely not jealous. No reason to be.

I agree that showing a work ethic to children is very important and they should know that work is what adults do to provide for themselves and their family.

I disagree a trust fund is equal to benefits though. A trust fund costs tax payers nothing and is family money. Benefits cost the tax payers and outcomes for children can be affected hence we have pupil premium in schools.

My friends half sister is supported completely by the family business (which their dad built up from nothing and became a self made millionaire). My friend runs the family business now as well as holding a paid position in government.

Her sister has fetal alcohol syndrome and is a single mum. She looks normal (facial features of FAS become less distinct in adults). She has been encouraged to find paid employment and has had cleaning jobs for periods of time but never held on to the job. If she hadn't been bought a house by the family and been provided with a regular income she would have had a life claiming benefits and costing the government.

OP you don't know the stories behind these families.

However he had reduced his own income to a level where he and his wife are eligible for state benefit, free prescriptions, etc. I would call that excellent financial planning to keep his money our of the grubby hands of the tax man.

I would call that taking the piss. Where do you think the money to pay for state benefits, free prescriptions etc comes from? It comes from taxes.

Sometimes I despair of people's pride in being stupid and greedy.

Good for them is what I think. We are brought up to "work hard", "stand on your own 2 feet" because really there is no choice.
If I won the lottery tomorrow I would Jack in paid work. And I would encourage my kids to fill their lives with adventures and doing stuff they are interested in, rather than the drudge that most adulting involves.

@memberofthewedding

I know someone in this position. This is a couple who came from a humble background, worked hard all their lives, and made money. All his money went into a Trust of which two relatives are the trustees. He has a lovely home. If it needs repair or he wants anything they buy it for him. However he had reduced his own income to a level where he and his wife are eligible for state benefit, free prescriptions, etc. I would call that excellent financial planning to keep his money our of the grubby hands of the tax man.

So you're ok with the millionaires moving their cash around sufficiently to also get benefits whilst living nothing like a benefits lifestyle? I'm assuming they're not in a council flat deciding between a fiver on the electric or fresh vegetables?

I don't know what the solution is for the problem of never having to work. It's obviously not as simple as doing a job you don't enjoy for money you have no use for.

I've regarded myself as semi-retired for a long time, turns out it's amazingly difficult to find projects that interest you once you've ruled out monetary gain as any part of the reason for doing them.

I find the fetishisation of hard work for financial reward mind boggling.

Work if you want to and/or need to. Don’t work if you don’t need to and don’t want to.

Earning “your own money” doesn’t make you somehow a better person.

The idea that we should all “work hard” to “set an example” and “teach the value of hard work” is nonsense. Why? Who says?

I’m lucky enough to work only because I love what I do. I have no intention of making my DC work for the sake of it. You get one life. What not spend it doing what you want.

Is it morally right to take a job that you don't need when others do very much need that job?

I'd say volunteering your time gives your children a far better message than working when you have a huge trust fund.

I am fortunate enough to be independently wealthy, I recognise others are not in this position, I will do volunteer work instead of competing in the job market.

I mean, that's a good thing to teach your kids too. A wider perspective rather than what is a very narrow and simplistic view.

Sounds blissful to me! And you sound jealous.

@memberofthewedding

where he and his wife are eligible for state benefit, free prescriptions, etc. I would call that excellent financial planning to keep his money our of the grubby hands of the tax man.

Not sure I follow this. Surely it's tax that funds state benefit, free prescriptions, etc.

Is your point that it is OK to receive from tax funds, just not to contribute to them?

@IceCreamAndCandyfloss

I disagree a trust fund is equal to benefits though. A trust fund costs tax payers nothing and is family money. Benefits cost the tax payers and outcomes for children can be affected hence we have pupil premium in schools.

Trust funds are often used to shelter family wealth from tax in Ofer to preserve it across the generations, so you could consider the cost to the tax payer exactly the high level of tax which would have been due, if the trust fund had not been used to avoid tax.

The purpose of the tax system is to fund those things which we as a society consider necessary, such as benefits for those circumstances mean that they require support and other public goods such as street lighting

'AcornAutumn

I actually prefer these rich people to live from their money rather than take a job someone else needs to pay bills. Unpopular opinion, I'm sure.

As for what you teach your kids, my parents were very hardworking, didn't have any effect on me.

This is a really good point actually.'

Actually, it is a really bad point!

It is from an old fashioned economic assumption, long ago disproved, that the economic pie is finite, so if one person worked less, it gave an opportunity to someone else.

The more people work and the more they produce, the more is in circulation in the economy and everyone benefits.

I do think that you make an interesting point. On the one hand, living off a trust fund is equally as lazy as living off benefits. Against this, however, is the fact that you are not asking anyway else to donate their tax money to support you.

So, I think people, supporting themselves, have every right to do what they want. OTOH, I don't think that they are very happy or fulfilled, or actually have a lot of resilience or confidence. A lot of the Corona threads on here are dominated by a subsection who don't work who 'can't do it any more', as they have no replacement for their gym and coffee mornings. I think it is a fragile thing to build an ego on.

I kniw a couple of men with small trust funds (and no mortgages) to live off, cand they are both ageing playboy types. Not in the way that they travel the world like James bond, having adventures and doing exciting things. More in the way they have given up their professional jobs and presumably see less need to fit into the "decent family man mould" to progress their careers.

They're both so similar, it's uncanny. Both run "vanity businesses" (businesses that make minimal profit and require only a few hours a week, but which make the business owner sound plausibly employed, both in sports related fields where they come into contact with a lot of women). They never have much money, because the trust funds give a basic subsistence level but no excess for things like holidays unless they spend the capital I guess.

One was my ex, the other tried it on with me, but wise to the type, I swiftly avoided him.

@TedMullins

I’ve come across a few of these types. They didn’t have perfect charmed lives - the fact they’d never had to work or support themselves had led to the ones I encountered living in large properties they didn’t maintain, floating around writing poetry, getting into toxic and dysfunctional relationships with other trust fund adults who didn’t know how to function and descending into alcohol and drug addiction. The lack of routine and purpose in their life and endless supply of money only enabled them to destroy themselves. Ironically they could end up drinking/snorting all the money away and ending up on benefits. I’m sure many trust fund recipients don’t end up like this but I agree, it isn’t good for anyone involved and frankly it’s why we need socialism. Benefits aren’t really comparable because they’re a safety net for people in need.

Oh good god

What a load of shite. And if we "need socialism" why in the name of blue fuck am I working?!

I see what you are saying OP, I think the difference is about choice/power really.

Someone who lives off inheritance/trust has options to work, they have opportunities to better themselves with education. They can travel, they can retrain, they can fulfil desires. They may not, but they have those options. Money breeds money too, so they can invest the money which can lead to bigger returns.

Someone on benefits is often stuck, not everyone, but I see it all the time, people who have had children young, didn't get an education and end up on benefits and there isn't a way out. They are usually worse off when working. I have friends who are on benefits and they will lose benefits if they do an online degree for example. They are stuck. They have less options, obviously everyone can overcome those but it's harder and riskier.

Lower income are often linked to poorer physical and mental health too, and I imagine that's a lot to do with lack of choice or power.

Depends. I know of at least two people like this and they are chalk and cheese. One is extremely successful in a very very well known company as VP. the other drinks and fannies about complaining how hard life is. Sets an AWFUL example for the kids.

Have to add though, ‘no better than anyone on benefits’ is extremely ill thought out statement. When your life falls apart and you are starving and are about to loose your home, benefits may be all you have until you get back on your feet. You need reassess your thinking on this. Extremely narrow minded

I’ve (have honestly and with my very own ears) heard this argument made for keeping women out of the workplace in times of recession where the husband already has a job.
So, no, if someone wants to work, is qualified, came by the job fairly and is offered the position they have every right in world to accept it.

I have much more of an issue with trust fund babies working for free in the “naice” jobs in the arts/fashion etc, because they can. And thus perpetuating these businesses getting away with not paying people and blocking access for others who can’t afford to work for nothing.

(Sorry that was in relation to pp who thought keeping well-off persons out of the job market was a good idea)

I'm currently on benefits since Decmber (thanks Covid) much rather be getting a trust fund tbh but I start my new job on Sunday woohoo so I'll less of a drain on the public purse!

From my own POV I honestly couldn't care less. I had no idea what the parents at the school gate had by way of money or where they got it from. What I do know is when I was a SAHP (not the same but still not earning my 'own' money) and DS was at school I did volunteering work. That actually helped me get my current, paid, job eventually. I was a SAHP as my mum had dementia as well as other illnesses and I couldn't go out to work and cover all the appointments she had to be escorted to (over 20 in one particular year - I can't see an employer allowing all that time off paid or not).

So, just because the 'work and get paid for it' ethic may not be there, doesn't mean the work ethic isn't. Quite a number of local voluntary organisations in our area are kept running by retired/SAHP/independent income people - they're the only ones who have control over their own time. Without them quite a few elderly people would have no visitors (pre Covid), those who are caring for someone would have no respite time to meet their friends, no food bank items would get distributed and appointments for hospitals etc wouldn't be covered for those who need help getting there and many of our stately homes etc wouldn't have staff to look after them so that we can enjoy them.

Not everyone who works is paid.

@AcornAutumn

I actually prefer these rich people to live from their money rather than take a job someone else needs to pay bills. Unpopular opinion, I'm sure.

As for what you teach your kids, my parents were very hardworking, didn't have any effect on me.

This. Especially now when unemployment is going to soar over the next few years. Nobody should be taking a job they don’t need.

@womaninatightspot

Congratulations!!! I know the feeling very well. Hope the job is everything you need it to be!